Lineman say ‘no’ to NFL, the impact & thoughts on Margus Hunt

January 10th, 2013 | Written by Rob Staton

Taylor Lewan will stay at Michigan for the 2013 season

In the last 24 hours Michigan’s Taylor Lewan and Texas A&M’s Jake Matthews both confirmed they won’t be turning pro this year. Lewan’s decision is surprising given Michigan’s status as an unlikely candidate for a BCS Bowl next season, but clearly he feels this is a realistic goal citing “unfinished business”. Matthews wants to put some left tackle tape on record having played on the right during Luke Joeckel’s time with the Aggies. Both players could’ve been top-15 picks this year, but will instead turn pro in 2014. Next year’s draft is shaping up to be a good one, with the following eligible:

Turning attentions back to this year, what impact will Lewan and Matthews’ decision have on the 2013 draft? There are multiple teams needing to find an answer at left tackle. Like quarterback, it’s considered a premium position that teams are willing to reach for to fill a need. By my count there are at least eight teams that would’ve considered tapping into a decent crop of young tackles this year. Now, there’s more likely to be higher demand at the top of round one for the best 2-3 available.

This isn’t great news for the Seahawks. They have a pro-bowl left tackle and are unlikely to target the position early. The more tackles going before they pick (between #25-32), the better chance a talented player at a different position makes it through. It seems certain that Luke Joeckel will be a top-five pick as the best player available at the position. Eric Fisher (T, Central Michigan) could see his stock boosted significantly following today’s announcements. Any of Lane Johnson (T, Oklahoma), Justin Pugh (T, Syracuse), Kyle Long (T/G, Oregon), Oday Aboushi (T, Virginia), D.J. Fluker (T, Alabama) or Brennan Williams (T, North Carolina) could also move into first round consideration as a consequence. Such is the perceived importance of the position.

However, not all of those players necessarily deserve first round grades. In my latest mock draft, I could only find a place for Joeckel, Fisher, Johnson and Pugh in round one. Even that seems optimistic. Pugh has shown flashes of quality this year protecting Ryan Nassib but isn’t a dominating tackle, while Johnson is a pure technician who looks well coached. I wouldn’t be totally surprised if Joeckel and Fisher were the only two who receive first round grades by many teams. North Carolina guard Jonathan Cooper could also receive interest as a tackle-convert given his superb athleticism and footwork. Kansas City’s Branden Albert made a similar switch after being drafted 15th overall in 2008.

Teams could be forced to look at different positions once the top 2-3 players leave the board. For example, the Chicago Bears could be a suitor for Stanford’s Zach Ertz. The Bears need an upgrade at tight end and appear ready to appoint an offensive minded Head Coach. If the value at tackle isn’t there when they pick at #20, Ertz could be the alternative choice. In this weeks mock I had Ertz going to Seattle at #26.

Another team who could show interest here? The St. Louis Rams. They are also expected to look at the tackle market, but might be out of reach picking at #16 and #22. Of course, they have the ammunition to move up. If they stay put, Ertz would make a lot of sense as a passing target for Sam Bradford.

While we’re on this subject, I found the following tweet from Daniel Jeremiah quite interesting:

I spoke to several Stanford coaches about Fleener prior to 2012 draft. Every one of them said Ertz was their top TE. I agree 100 percent.

It perhaps helps the Seahawks that there are multiple interior line prospects who could also go early. Teams like the Rams who are almost rebuilding their line from scratch could also look at Chance Warmack, the aforementioned Cooper or even prospects like Wisconsin’s Travis Frederick, Alabama’s Barrett Jones or Mississippi State’s Gabe Jackson. Again, the earlier those prospects leave the board – the more chance the Seahawks have of perhaps filling one of their biggest needs in terms of the pass rush, receiver or linebacker.

One player I’m struggling to work out is SMU’s Margus Hunt. Avid college football fans will know about him – for those who don’t, he’s a 6-8 discuss thrower from Estonia. He came to the United States to train at SMU and work with athletics coach Dave Wollman. By the time he arrived at the school it’d dropped the track and field programme. He still wanted to work with Wollman and to cut a long story short – a football scholarship would’ve enabled him to stick around. He tried out for the team and got the required scholarship.

After a period spent learning the game from scratch he’s gone on to break SMU’s record for blocked kicks, although he didn’t really start having a consistent impact on games until this season. He saw more consistent game time in 2012 and recorded eight sacks. I’ve included tape of his performance in the recent Hawaii Bowl against Fresno State below. As you can see, he has some talent.

He’s also still relatively new to football, he’ll be 26 next June and he hasn’t quite dominated like the Fresno State game too often. At that age, you can’t afford to wait a year or two coaching him up. He has to have an impact quickly. I’m struggling to work out if he’s a potential first rounder due to upside or if he’s simply too old and too good to be true.

Bruce Irvin turned 25 during his rookie season and still earned a top-15 selection due to his college production and explosive speed. Hunt won’t run a 4.4 at the combine, but at 6-8 and 275lbs he won’t necessarily need to. A time in the 4.6 range will be impressive enough at that size. Part of me wonders whether a former discuss thrower from Estonia with hardly any football experience is just the kind of pick Pete Carroll and John Schneider are likely to make.

From the limited tape that’s out there, he has lined up inside at tackle for some snaps. He’s not a full time interior pass rusher, but I just wonder if he could be a possible option for the Jason Jones role. It’ll be interesting to see if the Seahawks go for a more natural three-technique next year to replace Alan Branch (who still deserves a new contract in my opinion). If they don’t – and I wouldn’t say it’s guaranteed given their penchant for size the last three seasons – then they have to find other ways to create more pressure. Jones is no shoe-in to re-sign. Margus Hunt could act as that nickel interior rusher (although this doesn’t address the teams biggest issue – a lack of pressure rushing four in the base defense).

Of course acting in the Jones role will limit his snaps and makes a first or second round grade harder to accept, even for the quirky Seahawks. A team considering Hunt as an orthodox defensive end or five technique is much more likely to be willing to carry that grade. He’s not a LEO. He’ll never be a LEO. That may push his value into the middle rounds within Seattle’s front office, by which he might be long gone. But there’s just something about Hunt that is obscure enough and intriguing enough to catch the attention of this team. Even if he can only act as a specialist.

I really like this Margus Hunt kid, and I agree he could definitely fill the Jason Jones role. Size wise he doesn’t really fit in as a LEO or as a 5 technique in our scheme, but I think he has the talent to take snaps at both spots and could act as good defensive line depth.

If somehow we could get this guy in the 2nd round I think it would be a steal but I doubt he will be around by that time. Just like you said Rob, there’s just something about him between his athleticism and background that makes him seem like the type of player JS and PC would have on their radar.

I’m still hoping Ziggy Ansah somehow drops to us but it’s looking pretty much no chance sadly, he’d fit the Jason Jones position perfectly and also can easily play DE, but moving on as no point hedging on dreams.

I was looking at Hunt this morning actually, in particular his game against TCU and I seen moments of great play but a lot where he’s just out of position to make the tackle or getting blocked out by a freshman tackle.

Other guys I been looking that have a chance to be available is Devin Taylor (DE) from South Carolina and Bennie Logan (DT) from LSU but Logans tape is non existant and Taylor seems to fit the same mold as Hunt (the size of them helps).

Is it just me or does the DT class this year just seem to not fit what we’re looking for? Oh there’s some players that could play the 3 tech for us but they all seem to lack consistency or drive.

I think Ansah falls into the same category personally. Can you really take him in round one? He’s not a LEO. He might always have a specialist role on this defense in nickel formations. He’s new to football and still learning the game.

I guess it’s just the Ansah man crush I have. Would he fit in the team? As the Jason Jones role he would, but is that worth a first round pick as you said, probably not you could pickup Bennie Logan for that later on probably. I could see Ansah as a long term role to replace Red and while he lacks the mass I would not be surprised if he caused more problems with his size, speed and power once given the time to develop over a year or two.

Guess we’ll be looking at free agency for the three tech unless Richardson somehow falls to us. I can now see us looking much closer at the TE’s, WR’s or even OL if we stay around 26th

This game really was a highlight reel for him. But you can see multiple times where he was able to worm his way into a gap and split double teams effectively. This has been a consistent part of his game where he just has a knack for getting into the gap and squirting out the other end despite guard/tackle pinch.

Hunt has been a DE, and I really think his gifts translate to a 3 in our system well. If he can be tasked with attacking a gap consistently, I think he can have a lot of success. Obviously with that wingspan he *should* be able to bat down a lot of passes. He doesn’t and that concerns me.

He’s not always the most aware dude on the field either. He doesn’t have a real feel for the plays. Don’t expect him to sniff out trick plays/screens or shovel passes. It’s like he is concentrating so hard on his immediate task that he just doesn’t do the secondary things well.

He’s not the biggest 3 tech. But he’s not much smaller than Richardson. He has incredible strength. His age is also not ideal at all. But picking at the end of every round kind of requires that teams concede on several ‘ideals’.

If he doesn’t develop well, he is still naturally great at working an interior crease. In Pete SchneiderWorld where it’s about what you can do, then that’s Hunt’s meal ticket. If we want a guy to penetrate a gap and blow it up, then Hunt fits that billing.

The big concern I’d have in terms of a full-time three technique is he’s 6-8. It’s hard to get leverage inside at that height. Richardson is about 6-3 and nearly 300lbs. Hunt is 6-8 and 275lbs. Obviously it’s harder to get under Richardson’s pad level at that height or move him at 300lbs. With Hunt, he’s much leaner and you can get into his body and drive him away.

This is true. And pad level has been a long standing issue with Hunt. Although he has actually improved on that from last year. It would need to be something that he continues to improve on, because in college, he very often times would lose leverage, reset and then use his natural strength to force a stalemate.

This year, and you can see it on that tape, but it appears in other games too, he actually showcases that improvement. Taking on double team blocks and not giving ground much, if at all. The number of looks we see him inside (either 3 tech on strong side, or at the 2 and 3 weakside) this year is somewhat telling for me. He looks like he performs well at least at the college level when he slides inside. It’s possible that he improved on that point and his coaches felt like they could now trust lining him up there. In 2011, it seemed he was almost always lined up outside the tackle.

It is hard to get leverage at that height. But we also see OL now creeping into the 6’4″ to 6’7″ range too. He is nowhere near as consistent with leverage as Richardson, or the two Williams’. However if you compare him to say, Dontari Poe last year you don’t see Hunt getting pushed back 3-5 yards consistently either.

If Margus is going to play the 3 and they run at him, he’s probably not going to make the tackle. He doesn’t disengage well at the point of attack. You see it in the TCU footage, and in the bowl game. But even on a game that looks like he struggles, if you look at the plays he’s lined up inside, and in particular those where he takes on 2 blockers, he’s able to stand his ground quite well and eat up blockers. When lined up inside, he doesn’t rise up like he does when he’s at end. And that’s encouraging.

Do I think he can be an everydown 3? Not without some improvement. I think that differentiates Sylvester and Sheldon from Margus. Can he be effective as a situational 3? I think he’s a distinct improvement from Jason Jones in this regard, particularly given his natural ability to really slide through gaps like he’s covered in grease. So yeah I think he has very good value in that role.

This is a guy who today, is not going to end the search for an every down 3 tech upgrade. But I think he has the ability to play the end opposite Irvin at the Leo should we ultimately find that 3. His value isn’t going to be preempted because our search finally ends. I find this versatility very similar to the Carpenter selection in 2011. If he doesn’t make the improvements, he has the ability to move elsewhere and sustain value despite him busting at the position he was drafted for.

The problem will ultimately be how well is a 26 year old prospect going to improve? It’s really no different than Irvin to be honest. I haven’t seen Irvin really visibly improve over the course of this year. Not like you can see from Wilson or Wagner or even Sweezy.

I think you’d agree that when you pick late in the first round, and take a guy that you’re probably reaching on — there is risk. We’ve seen that risk blow up with Carpenter somewhat, and at least I’m not comfortable with the lack of improvement in Irvin’s game either. I just get the sense that this is one of those versatile, risk picks that is sure to set Kiper’s hair on fire, high ceiling reaches that is starting to become the signature of this FO.

Speaking of the Red Bryant role, do you think that it’s part of the pass rush problem? Since we struggle to generate enough pressure in the middle to collapse the pocket we end up relying on the LEO to get the pressure since Red will rarely cause much problems when it comes to a pass. If we changed to a more conventional front four (or even 3-4) do you think that could help without sacrificing too much personal?

They won’t change the scheme. This is the 4-3 under that Monte Kiffin devised and Carroll and Bradley are both disciples of Kiffin. It would have less of an impact if they had a truly excellent interior pass rusher to aid the LEO. But part of the setup of the 4-3 under is to lean the pass rush to one side and dominate, and have a big guy at the other end spot who can take up blocks. Without Bryant in that role, this defense doesn’t work. That’s why he got paid.

Cool, had a sit down there with some proper 4-3 under information to really get a better idea and yup, as much as I have a man crush on Ansah he wouldn’t fit other than as a Jason Jones role (seond round? i’m grasping at straws) and can see better how the defense works.

Kentwan Balmer was brought in to compete for the role at 315 pounds. EJ Wilson was drafted to compete for the role at 288 pounds. Hunt is a long ways away from 300 pounds, but at 6’8″, he could certainly get there while still maintaining his athleticism.

Breno Giacomini was once a 242 pound Tight End who had converted from DE. He’s currently at 318, and has similar height and length to Hunt.

I could definitely see Hunt in a Red Bryant role. Perhaps not in 2013, but eventually. Hunt looks at his best when playing a power DE.

Actually, one argument against Hunt is that he looks like a classic one gap player. IIRC, Seattle still uses Bryant in a two gap role. From what I’ve heard, two gap roles are going out of fashion even in 3-4 defenses. Maybe Seattle’s hybrid style could follow suit.

While you are correct that we running a variant of the 4-3 under, it’s really just semantics. You look at 4-3 teams around the league- how many have 330 pound guys at strong side end? Even most 3-4 DEs who are responsible for two-gaps are not as large as Bryant.

My point about the 3-4 is that typically a 3-4 will use a bunch of large, 2-gap lineman up front, but in recent years 3-4 teams have begun to adopt a 1-gap philosophy because it is invariably superior for pass rushing.

My hat’s off to Pete. He’s shown incredible flexibility. One of his first moves was drafting Thomas because it would allow him to get away with more in the remaining parts of the secondary. One of the reasons he wanted more speed at linebacker was to less the burden on the secondary, particularly against the screen. You might say that Pete’s philosophy boils down to making one guys life a little harder so that it’s easier for someone else. Red Bryant continues that line of thought.

The problem is- it’s not working up front. The other problem is- it relies on having a star at the 3-tech, and those don’t exactly grow on trees. Part of the appeal of the Earl Thomas strategy was that it allowed him to build a great secondary at low cost by targeting players who weren’t considered fast enough for a normal defense. That’s smart. On the D-line, it’s the opposite. He’s forcing himself to buy big into the hardest part of any front four.

Why do that when a conventional approach is easier?

I think eventually Pete will realize that there isn’t anything to gain from doing it the hard way, and few coaches adapt as quickly and willingly as Pete does. If even 3-4 defenses are moving away from the 2-gap philosophy, I could see Pete doing it. And frankly, I hope he does.

The difference between an orthodox 4-3 though and the 4-3 under is the position of the LEO and three technique almost set to the extreme right, meaning if you don’t have size at the end position we’re going to get destroyed against the run. I’m not sure which other teams use the 4-3 under so I wouldn’t really expect any other DE’s to be 330lbs. It really isn’t semantics to describe the specific scheme we are using, the requirements and why we’ve made Red Bryant the most expensive player on the defense. His role is crucial for this team. And I’d argue the only reason people say it’s not working is because they expect (unrealistically) that to be a pass rushing position. It isn’t at all. The pass rushing responsibility on this team is totally weighted to the three tech and the LEO. And it’s the three technique that’s letting us down for a pass rush because we don’t have a true three tech. I don’t think anyone should expect us to move away from this scheme. We’re one player away from it working like a dream.

I just can’t see it Kip. After all, Balmer didn’t win the job and Wilson last no time at all on the roster. Getting up to Balmer’s weight at 315lbs will still take a rise of 40lbs and he’s not small even now. But I think the main issue is, more than anything, the Bryant position is designed to soak up blocks and seal an end. Set the edge, stop teams exploiting the run on that side because the pressure is bunched up on the other side. At 6-8 and with his technique, and with his age, I’m not sure you’re going to be able to coach him into that. Right now he has major issues with leverage against the run and pad level, which will make him a complete liability in that position.

Plus more than anything, we just aren’t looking to replace Bryant. He just signed a deal to make him the highest paid defensive player. We worked aggressively to get that deal done.

I’m not really worried about Bryant’s contract. After next year his guaranteed money is used up. And I’m pretty sure that teams running 3-4’s and hybrid defenses would line up around the block to take that contract off our hands for us, if it came to that. Maybe it’s true that Seattle is planning around Bryant long term, but the way his contract is structured, it has a very easy get out after 2013. That makes me suspect his contract was more of an extension of the Red Bryant experiment.

I agree that Hunt probably isn’t a 2 gap player unless he adds a ton of weight. I could see him as a monster 3-4 end type with a 1 gap responsibility, though. I say, do it Carroll. KJ Wright is a monster at setting the edge on the strong side. Lean on that the way that you lean on Earl in the secondary.

I respect your opinion Kip but I couldn’t disagree more on this one. I think this is more weighted to the scheme Pete wants – the 4-3 under – and Bryant is and has been crucial to it. We shouldn’t expect pass rushing from that position. We need to upgrade the 3-technique and we’ll see this scheme at its best.

We saw flashes of this when Jason Jones played the 3-tech, didn’t we? Unfortunately we lost him – and Clemons – when we needed them most. What are the chances we retain Jones and do you think he’s adequate at 3-tech (and elsewhere situationally) to get the job done?

Like was said, elite 3-techs are rare. Gerald McCoy is the most recent one that immediately comes to mind and he went top-5 overall along with Suh.

Based on what Carroll said today, I think they’ll move on from Jones unless it’s a really modest deal. The injuries were frustrating but not uncommon for him. The three-technique position is one of the hardest to fill. I’ve just written a new piece on some of the options – I’d recommend checking it out on the home page.

Comparing the strength of this year’s class to next year’s might lend a bit more weight to the thought of looking to trade out of this year’s first round pick. Of course that all depends on how PC/JS view the two classes, what they’re looking for, and all that, but adding another first round pick (if possible) in a deeper class might be preferable.

The only issue with that is it’s going to be a buyers market. Lots of teams will be thinking the same. And with a late first round pick, you’re not going to get as much value.

Not even sure a straight up 2012 first for a 2013 first is likely at where we are picking. It’s hard to move out of the late first round. The Carpenter pick is a prime example. We had deals but they were low ball offers. It’s likely to be just as hard to move as it was in 2011.

It’s a fine idea. If we can manage it, awesome. But you’ll be competing with several other teams looking to move out too. Every year there are 10 fan bases all advocating ‘trade down’. You rarely see any saying, ‘Hey, Brandon Weeden is going to be available in round 2, let’s move up into round one to take the fifth best QB in this class!”

Interesting Idea… I still think with so many teams needing a QB, that we should USE Matt Flynn in a package deal to either trade up our 2nd pick to earlier in the round, or like you mention, maybe bundle him with a trade down and end up with 2 Number 1’s next year, and still 7 or so picks this year… Nice idea…Especially if that EQUALED Brandon Coleman &/or some amazing defensive player!!

(Still am excited to see PC/JS pick an offensive weapon of ANY kind with pick number 1! Even Eddie Lacey a RB would still make me happy. He would hopefully help keep Lynch healthier LONGER. But WR / TE would be awesome to me, and prob for RW!)

How many teams do you think just reach for tackles in round 1? Just draft for need and move on…or, perhaps conversely, does this mean more teams looking to trade down out of round 1? It seems like either case preserves options for late 1st round pickers, like the Hawks, (who will be picking 32 )

Recently declared andseems built in the similar huge and athletic mold of Hunt, 6-7, 280. Also put up very similar stats to him as well through only 11 games (against Pac 12 fwiw). Have seen him listed a bit lower on big boards a.t.m, so could be available in Rd 2 – and also has bloodlines to the league. Brother Paul is doing pretty well for the Ravens and apparently claims Joe is the more athletic one.

Rob,
Just because Red is 330 lbs doesn’t mean his “replacement” has to be 330 too. While we do run a unique system, Red could play bigger or smaller and still be effective. Our system is unique in that Red takes on a double team often and having another player in his role wouldn’t change that unless we changed our system. I love Red, but paying him three down money when he’s a two down player in our system was a slight mistake. While I would love Hunt as a 3 tech I think his age is a major factor as he has no polish now but still great upside.
Really though the only questions you have to ask: Are his problems fixable with coaching? And are we willing to draft him in the first round? I think a number of 3-4 teams would be willing to draft Hunt in the second before we get another chance. He screams Houston to me if they aren’t able to retain Conner Barwin.

On a side (joke) note, Pete would probably love his versatility as a discuss thrower on defense. Greatly underrated feature that would add a huge advantage to our defense..

I disagree Cliff, I think size is vital for that position. Strength and the ability to fill space, take up two blockers is really the definition of the position he’s playing – that and setting the edge. When Bryant was doubtful for the Chicago game, Carroll said Branch would move to DE if he couldn’t go. So they were willing to move the teams starting three-technique to the Bryant position. Branch is 325lbs. And that would’ve meant 285lbs Greg Scruggs starting inside.

I’m not sure why people think this is a mistake. The 4-3 under is designed to put the LEO and the three-technique together and to attack one side. It creates a disadvantage on the other side of the line and system needs a guy like Bryant. We can sit hear and talk about this all day, but the guy who has turned around this franchise thinks he’s one of the most important players on the team. The heart and soul. That’s why he got paid. There’s not any great free thinking here – it’s just a pure 4-3 under scheme. And it’s had a lot of success so far. Put a proper three-technique in the line-up and it’ll be even better. Elite even.

Search the blog

Search for:

Disclaimer
The views and opinions on this website in no way represent the views of the Seattle Seahawks franchise. All images used on the blog belong to their owners.SDB reserves the right to delete any offensive material posted by visitors.